I Stegeman1, S C van Doorn2, M W Mundt3, R C Mallant-Hent3, E Bongers4, M A G Elferink5, P Fockens2, A K Stroobants6, P M Bossuyt1, E Dekker7. 1. Department of Clinical Epidemiology, Biostatistics and Bioinformatics, Academic Medical Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. 2. Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Academic Medical Centre, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. 3. Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Flevoziekenhuis, Almere, The Netherlands. 4. Foundation of Population screening Mid-West, The Netherlands. 5. Department of Research and Registration, Comprehensive Cancer Centre the Netherlands, Utrecht, The Netherlands. 6. Department of Clinical Chemistry, Academic Medical Centre, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. 7. Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Academic Medical Centre, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. Electronic address: e.dekker@amc.nl.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The effectiveness of colorectal cancer screening programs based on the fecal immunochemical test (FIT) is influenced by program adherence during consecutive screening rounds. We aimed to evaluate the participation rate, yield, and interval cancers in a third round of biennial CRC screening using FIT and to compare those with the first and the second screening round. METHODS: A total of 3566 average-risk individuals aged 50-75 years were invited to participate in a third round of biennial FIT-based CRC screening. All FIT positives were recommended to undergo colonoscopy. We merged our data with the national cancer registry in the Netherlands to identify all non-screen-detected cancers in our cohort. RESULTS: Of the invitees, 2142 (60%) returned the FIT in this third screening round, compared to 56% in the second round and 57% in the first round. Overall, 153 of the third-round participants (7.1%) had a positive FIT result, versus 7.9% in the second round and 8.1% in the first round (P=0.05). Of all FIT positives, 123 (80%) underwent colonoscopy. Within this group, 33 persons had advanced neoplasia. The predictive value of FIT positivity for advanced neoplasia was 27% (33/123), compared to 42% in the second round and 54% in the first round - a significant decline (P<0.01). CONCLUSION: In an FIT-based screening program, participation rates remained stable over consecutive biennial screening rounds, while the FIT positivity rate and positive predictive value for advanced neoplasia gradually declined. Cancers in non-participants are significantly more advanced in staging than cancers in participants in the first round of screening.
BACKGROUND: The effectiveness of colorectal cancer screening programs based on the fecal immunochemical test (FIT) is influenced by program adherence during consecutive screening rounds. We aimed to evaluate the participation rate, yield, and interval cancers in a third round of biennial CRC screening using FIT and to compare those with the first and the second screening round. METHODS: A total of 3566 average-risk individuals aged 50-75 years were invited to participate in a third round of biennial FIT-based CRC screening. All FIT positives were recommended to undergo colonoscopy. We merged our data with the national cancer registry in the Netherlands to identify all non-screen-detected cancers in our cohort. RESULTS: Of the invitees, 2142 (60%) returned the FIT in this third screening round, compared to 56% in the second round and 57% in the first round. Overall, 153 of the third-round participants (7.1%) had a positive FIT result, versus 7.9% in the second round and 8.1% in the first round (P=0.05). Of all FIT positives, 123 (80%) underwent colonoscopy. Within this group, 33 persons had advanced neoplasia. The predictive value of FIT positivity for advanced neoplasia was 27% (33/123), compared to 42% in the second round and 54% in the first round - a significant decline (P<0.01). CONCLUSION: In an FIT-based screening program, participation rates remained stable over consecutive biennial screening rounds, while the FIT positivity rate and positive predictive value for advanced neoplasia gradually declined. Cancers in non-participants are significantly more advanced in staging than cancers in participants in the first round of screening.
Authors: Amit G Singal; Samir Gupta; Celette Sugg Skinner; Chul Ahn; Noel O Santini; Deepak Agrawal; Christian A Mayorga; Caitlin Murphy; Jasmin A Tiro; Katharine McCallister; Joanne M Sanders; Wendy Pechero Bishop; Adam C Loewen; Ethan A Halm Journal: JAMA Date: 2017-09-05 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Douglas J Robertson; Jeffrey K Lee; C Richard Boland; Jason A Dominitz; Francis M Giardiello; David A Johnson; Tonya Kaltenbach; David Lieberman; Theodore R Levin; Douglas K Rex Journal: Am J Gastroenterol Date: 2016-10-18 Impact factor: 10.864
Authors: Wessel van de Veerdonk; Sarah Hoeck; Marc Peeters; Guido Van Hal; Julie Francart; Isabel De Brabander Journal: United European Gastroenterol J Date: 2019-10-03 Impact factor: 4.623
Authors: Kevin Selby; Emma H Levine; Cecilia Doan; Anton Gies; Hermann Brenner; Charles Quesenberry; Jeffrey K Lee; Douglas A Corley Journal: Gastroenterology Date: 2019-08-22 Impact factor: 22.682